Dead End?...

I usually avoid thinking about the environment, because whenever I have thought of it, my thinking process reaches a dead end.
Yeah I did my Masters in Environment Science and I guess I am expected to read and think about the environment and be up to date with the statistics..What for?

There has been 12.8% increase in GHG emissions by developed nations in 2007 compared to 1990 levels as per the reports. There is increase of emissions dispite all so called measures! But there has been no dearth in concern and conventions and the blame game. The only thing that is not there is reduction in the emissions.

What can I do about it apart from reading and keeping track of the conventions and the figures? Can I stop going out on pleasure trips because I have to use a vehicle to reach there..Should I be thinking about how my vehicle helps to escape to natural environments or do I worry about how it is responsible for polluting the environment.
Should I avoid going to supermarkets because they have not found an alternative to plastic covers. I have racked my brain often and have not been able to think of a better alternative than plastics. It just doesn't seem possible...Should the supermarkets give us our purchase in synthetic cloth bags and charge a little extra from the customers? Anyway what unnatural product doesn't cause pollution at some stage;during manufacture, use or disposal? And what natural product does not get depleted or lead to a depletion in some way when extensively used or produced? Say how much of land has to used for the cultivation of crops, the non edible oil of which can be used as a bio-fuel, to produce a fair enough supplement to fossil fuels?(Fargione et al. (2008) estimated that the conversion of rainforests, peatlands, savannahs or grasslands to produce ethanol and biodiesel in Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia or the United States of America releases at least 17 times as much carbon dioxide as those biofuels save annually by replacing fossil fuels.) So is it really a feasible alternative? Inexhaustible resources? Solar Power? Doesn't cost put us off when we look to harness the inexhaustible resources on a large scale?
...Don't we always end up at a dead end?

But I am an optimist or maybe I want to be an optimist..and so I hope it is my limited intellectual capacities that make me unable to see that there is actually a way out and that it is not a dead end.

The human mind has solved a lot of problems over the centuries. But solutions sometimes brings other problems as side effects.. Yeah, I really DONT blame man for pollution!
Man found solutions to how to travel fast and faster, how to fly in the sky, How to operate without causing pain, How to prolong lives, create immunity, how to clothe ourselves better, how to create more supplies of food, how to keep away mosquitoes so that we can sleep well. . Can we do without these developments? If we can't , we also can't grumble about the side effects can we?

Man has noticed very well the enormity of the problems that some of his solutions have created and so is working on a solution(hopefully... side effect free)

I trust in man's unique intellectual gifts and have been waiting and am waiting for a smart brain to come up with the right answers...

And till that happens...I don't really want to know the statistics.....

PS: I am beginning think (hope I wont be sounding depressing) that the universe is not just intended to have been created and sustained for eternity. Maybe the cycle has to end with destruction and a new cycle has to begin (as all scriptures have always been saying). Well, why am I suddenly thinking so? Because just ponder..is man not a part of nature? Is his intelligence not nature's gift and if that intelligence is causing imbalance in nature leading to the possibilities of destruction ...then isn't actually nature doing this to itself?!
Of course we cant end on that note..Maybe we can just say that it is up to Man to work out a longer 'sustainance' possibility